THE  POLITICAL  ASSESSMENT 
OF  OFFICE  HOLDERS 


A REPORT  ON  THE  SYSTEM  AS  PRACTISED  BY 
THE  REPUBLICAN  ORGANIZATION  IN 
THE  CITY  OF  PHILADELPHIA 
1883-1913 

ILLUSTRATED  WITH  REPRODUCTIONS  OF  ORIGINAL 
DOCUMENTS 


THIS  PAMPHLET  IS  NOT  PRINTED  AT  PUBLIC  EXPENSE 


DEPARTMENT  OF  PUBLIC  WORKS 
ROOM  216  CITY*  HALL 
PHILADELPHIA 
1913 


Page  from  Log  Book,  Truck  House  No.  9 
Located  at  21st  and  Market  Streets 


Showing  schedule  political  assessments  levied  against  firemen  on  Novem- 
ber 1,  1911,  a few  days  before  Mayor  Blankenburg’s  election.  See  Appendix 
A for  translation  of  this  public  record. 


^51.  tH  ^ 


REPORT  ON  THE 

POLITICAL  ASSESSMENT  OF  OFFICE- 
HOLDERS 

To  the  Honorable  Rudolph  Blankenburg, 

Mayor  of  Philadelphia. 

My  dear  Mr.  Mayor, — In  every  large  city  in  this  country 
a political  assessment  of  the  office-holders  has  been  one  of 
the  vicious  features  of  machine  control.  It  has  been  gener- 
ally recognized  that  in  this  respect  Philadelphia  has  been  no 
exception.  The  statements  made  from  time  to  time  in  the 
newspapers  and  on  the  political  platform,  taken  with  the 
common  talk  of  the  street,  have  tended  on  the  whole,  I be- 
lieve, to  suggest  that  perhaps  the  systematic  assessment  of 
office-holders  in  this  City  has  been  carried  to  a further  extent 
by  the  dominant  political  machine  than  anywhere  else  in 
the  world.  So  startling,  however,  has  been  the  confirmation  of 
this  generally  accepted  belief  that  I feel  it  to  be  my  duty  to 
place  upon  the  record  at  least  a part  of  the  information  which 
has  reached  me  entirely  through  official  sources  and  supported 
and  substantiated  by  what  must  be  considered  official  papers. 

While  the  public  has  generally  understood  that  campaigns 
have  in  very  large  measure  been  financed  through  the  politi- 
cal assessment  of  office-holders,  I feel  sure  that  the  amounts 
collected  and  the  relentlessness  with  which  practically  every 
office-holder  was  made  to  “stand  and  deliver ” has  not  been 
generally  appreciated.  It  is  a fair  statement  that  in  no  single 
year  in  the  last  ten  years  has  the  amount  contributed  directly 
by  office-holders  to  the  Republican  campaign  funds  been  less 
than  a quarter  of  a million  dollars,  which  amount  was  the 
sum  raised  in  1911,  the  year  in  which  you  were  elected.  Dur- 
ing the  previous  year,  1910,  almost  half  a million  was  so 
collected,  and  even  ten  years  ago,  or  in  1903,  the  figures 
approximated  $350,000.  I can  hardly  believe  that  the  public 


4 

DEPARTMENT  OF  PUBLIC  WORKS, 

DIRECTOR'S  OFFICE. 

contribution  to  republic  a;.  CITY  CAMPAIGN  COMMITTEE, 


Nam®. 

Anount , 

Peter  E.  Costello, 

*3 

$5400.00 

Wra.  H.  Baker, 

<3 

120.00 

Willis  Ghable , 

$ 22.60 

Lewis  R*  Snow, 

0 

22.50 

Rob’t.  C.  Kick®* 

0 

13.00 

Ernest  T.  HaneCeld 

0 

15.00 

.Andrew  L.  Tearcer, 

o 

15.00 

Harry  A.  Stoy, 

<3 

9.00 

Roscoe  C.  Lockwcod, 

O 

9.00 

J.  J.  Johnston, 

a 

7.00 

$638.00 

/ \ £ 

to 

/o 

o 

Photographic  Reproduction  of  Director’s  Office  Schedule 

The  long  hand  entries  were  made  by  the  Director’s  private  secretary.  The  only 
employee  whose  name  does  not  appear  is  the  janitress. 


and  the  office-holders  will  fail  to  be  shocked  to  have  proven 
that  in  the  last  ten  years  over  $3,000,000  have  been  taken 
out  of  the  pockets  of  the  office-holders  and  used  ostensibly 
for  keeping  these  office-holders  in  office,  but  actually  for  the 
political  enslavement  of  all  the  people. 

Owing  to  the  fact  that  up  to  and  including  1910  there  were 
two  elections  a year,  while  in  1911  there  was  only  one,  a con- 
siderable reduction  in  the  amounts  previously  assessed  was 
made  in  the  year  during  which  you  came  into  office.  If  the 
rates  which  had  prevailed  in  1910  had  been  used  in  1911, 
1912,  and  1913  the  total  amount  raised  in  each  year  would 


5 


have  been  $500,000  and  over.  May  I remind  you  that  this 
venal  system  is  still  in  full  force  and  effect  among  a very  large 
number  of  the  employees  whose  salaries  and  wages  are  paid 
by  the  tax-payers  of  the  City?  That  part  which  would  have 
been  contributed  by  employees  under  your  direction,  of  course, 
has  been  saved  to  them  since  you  have  been  Mayor.  All  our 
information,  however,  goes  to  show  that  the  rates  of  assess- 
ment for  the  employees  in  the  County  offices  and  City  offices 
not  controlled  by  you  and  the  City  Solicitor  have  been  raised 
so  as,  in  a measure,  to  make  up  the  difference. 

A clearer  idea  of  how  these  contributions  total  year  by 
year  can  be  had  from  the  following  table,  on  which  the  amounts 
contributed  in  1912  and  1913,  estimated  on  the  basis  of  the 
increase  in  the  pay-roll,  are  printed  in  bold-face  type: 


Estimate  of  Assessments  Paid  During  Period  1903-1913 


Department  of  Public 
Works 

All  City  and  County 
Departments 

1903 

$53,697.75 

$349,035.38 

1904 

60,957.61 

367,650.60 

1905 

68,217.48 

386,265.82 

1906 

75,477.35 

404,881.04 

1907 

82,737.21 

423,496.26 

1908 

89,997.08 

442,111.48 

1909 

97,256.94 

460,726.70 

1910 

104,516.80 

479,341.92 

1911 

55,888.34 

248,978.57  (One  election) 

1912 

*59,518.27 

258,286.18  “ 

1913 

*63,148.20 

267,593.79  “ “ 

$688,746.56 

$4,088,367.74  Grand  total  for  ten  yrs. 

* These  amounts  — not  included  in  total  — represent  the  savings  in  two  years  to  Em- 
ployees Department  of  Public  Works. 


All  through  the  departments  under  your  direction  we 
find  records  of  this  abominable  system.  In  order  to  illus- 
trate the  completeness  with  which  it  is  carried  out  I have 
elected  the  fall  campaign  of  1903  as  a typical  example.  I 


6 


take  it  because  the  records  for  this  period  are  absolutely 
complete  and  convincing,  and,  as  it  was  for  a campaign  in 
which  there  was  very  little  public  interest  and  in  which  the 
necessity  for  the  raising  of  campaign  funds  was  almost  missing, 
it  will,  I think,  be  accepted  as  a conclusive  evidence  of  the 
general  methods  which  have  been  used  throughout  the  last 
generation.  This  is  none  too  strong  an  expression  because  I 
have  in  my  possession  statements  of  employees  of  the  Survey 
Bureau  that  they  paid  these  assessments  over  thirty  years  ago. 
I have  other  statements  of  present  employees  of  the  Depart- 
ment which  show  that  up  to  1910  they  paid  political  assess- 
ments twice  a year  during  various  periods  running  from  twenty 
to  thirty  years.  To  show  that  the  system  was  intact  prac- 
tically at  the  time  you  took  office,  I refer  you  to  the  official 
record  of  the  Department  of  Public  Safety,  used  as  a frontis- 
piece of  this  report.  It  is  a log  dated  November  1,  1911,  in 
which  the  employees  of  Truck  House  No.  9 located  at  Market 
and  21st  Streets  were  assessed  according  to  the  prevailing 
scale.  Let  me  remind  you  that  this  was  only  a few  days  be- 
fore your  election. 

To  return  to  the  Department  of  Public  Works  and  the 
records  for  the  fall  campaign  of  1903.  I have  in  my  possession 
in  the  form  of  original  and  official  departmental  records 

First  — A schedule  of  assessment  rates  calling  for  assess- 
ments as  follows  : 


1 per  cent  on  salaries  of. 

l|  “ “ “ 

2 u a n u u 

g u u u << 

£ U U Cl  11  (( 


5 900  and  under 
1000  to  $1900 
2000  to  2900 
3000  to  5900 
6000  and  over 
[See  reproduction  on  page  7.] 

Second  — An  absolutely  complete  list  of  all  the  subscrip- 
tions made  in  that  year  by  employees  of  the  Department 
listing  1809  individual  subscriptions  at  a time  when  there 
were  1924  employees,  thereby  showing  that  94%  of  our 
employees  paid  these  assessments.  [See  photographs,  pages 
4,  8,  14,  and  15.] 


7 


Third  — Remittance  sheets,  showing  the  way  in  which  the 
money  was  remitted  to  the  City  Committee. 

Fourth  — Recapitulations,  both  by  divisions  of  the  ser- 
vice and  kinds  of  currency.  [See  photographs,  page  10.] 
Fifth  — Correspondence  between  employees  of  the  Depart- 
ment and  the  Director’s  Office  in  regard  to  payments. 
Sixth  — Lists  of  non-contributors,  the  latter  unfortunately 
containing  very  few  names. 

One  per  cent  to  $900 

One  and  a half  per  cent,  1000  to  1900, 

Two  per  cent,  2000  to  2900. 

Three  per  cent,  3000  to  5900. 

Four  per  cent,  6000  and  over. 

Photographic  Reproduction  of  Official  Rate  Card 

These  percentages  were  paid  twice  a year  to  the  City  Committee.  A half 
of  these  percentages  were  paid  twice  a year  to  the  Ward  Committees. 

In  order  to  determine  the  extent  to  which  this  system  per- 
meated the  Department,  I caused  to  be  made  up  a roll  of  our 
employees  as  of  September  1,  1903,  two  months  before  the 
election.  This  roll  is  printed  as  Appendix  B.  While  there 
are  nearly  2000  names  on  this  roll  there  are  only  115  names 
on  it  who  did  not  pay  assessments.  In  a number  of  cases 
those  listed  were  not  in  the  employ  of  the  City  and  there- 
* fore  not  assessable  at  the  time  the  assessments  were  made, 
from  four  to  six  weeks  later.  On  the  other  hand,  there  were 
assessments  obtained  from  a number  of  employees  not 
carried  on  these  rolls,  for  the  simple  reason  that  they 
entered  the  City  service  after  the  rolls  were  made  up,  but 
before  election. 

The  record  shows  that  the  percentage  of  employees  by 
Bureaus  who  paid  these  assessments  was  as  follows: 


8 


Director’s  Office 90.9 

Bureau  of  Gas 100 

“ “ Lighting 87j 

“ Highways 95 

“ “ Surveys 93 

“ “ Water 94 


In  view  of  this  fact  that  94%  of  all  employees  paid  these 
assessments  which  shows  there  is  a certain  grim  humor  in  the  use 
of  quotation  marks  around  the  word  “ Contributions”  in  the 
schedule  of  the  Bureau  of  Lighting,  photograph  of  which  is  shown 
on  page  16.  This  schedule  affords  conclusive  evidence  that  men 
who  did  not  pay  assessments  could  not  stay  in  the  service. 


BUREAU  OF  CAS. 
Rooms  330-332 
City  Hall. 


“All  Present!  ” 


This  is  the  only  bureau  showing  100%  efficiency.  Everybody  paid!  This 
bureau  also  had  the  distinction  of  always  just  “eating  up”  its  $10,000 
annual  appropriation. 

Opposite  each  name  on  the  roll  printed  as  Appendix  B,  I 
have  indicated  the  rate  and  amount  of  the  assessment  made 
for  the  benefit  of  the  City  Committee  prior  to  the  Fall  Election 
in  1903.  These  individual  payments  total  $17,899.25  for  the 
Department  of  Public  Works  alone. 

The  practice  in  the  making  of  assessments  was  to  the 
effect  that  the  City  assessment  (a  schedule  of  rates  for  which 


9 


is  shown  on  page  7)  was  made  twice  a year,  once  before 
each  election.  Every  office-holder  received  a written  noti- 
fication when  this  assessment  became  due.  Every  office- 
holder also  paid  to  the  Ward  Committee  one-half  of  the  City 
assessment  before  each  election.  So  that  to  obtain  the  total 
payments  by  employees  of  the  Department  of  Public  Works 
in  1903  on  the  regular  assessments,  one  must  multiply  the 
printed  rate  by  three,  which  shows  that  the  employees  of 
the  Department  of  Public  Works  alone  paid  almost  $54,000 
in  this  one  year. 

The  following  table  shows  the  method  under  which  the 
annual  assessment  rates  for  the  several  salary  and  wage  scales 
were  figured  out. 


Yearly  Assessment  Rates 


$900 

and 

under 

$1000 

to 

$1900 

$2000 

to 

$2900 

$3000 

to 

$5900 

$6000 
and  over 

Spring  election 

— City  Committee 

1% 

u% 

2% 

3% 

4% 

U U 

Ward 

\% 

\% 

1% 

H% 

2% 

Fall  election 

-City 

1% 

H% 

2% 

3% 

4% 

U (C 

Ward 

\% 

i% 

1% 

H% 

2% 

Total  annual  assessment  rates  

3% 

4|% 

6% 

9% 

12% 

The  following  table  shows  the  amount  contributed  each 
year  in  these  regular  assessments: 


Revenue  from  Assessments  on  Various  Salaries 


$600  @ 3% 

$18.00 

$1200  @ 4|% 

$54.00 

$3000  @ 

9% 

$270.00 

720  “ “ 

21.60 

$500  “ “ 

67.50 

3500  “ 

U 

315.00 

750  “ “ 

22.50 

1800  “ “ 

81.00 

4000  “ 

C6 

360.00 

800  “ “ 

24.00 

2000  “ 6% 

120.00 

8000  “ 

U 

960.00 

840  “ “ 

25.20 

2100  “ “ 

126.00 

6000  “ 

12% 

720.00 

900  “ “ 

27.00 

2400  “ “ 

144.00 

8000  “ 

U 

960.00 

$1000  “ “ 

45.00 

2500  “ “ 

150.00 

$10000  “ 

(( 

$1200.00 

1100  “ “ 

49.50 

2800  “ “ 

168.00 

12000  “ 

(C 

1440.00 

10 


e/ 


peprlmetti  of  public  pjorhs, 


Bureau  or  Water, 

Office  General  Superintendent, 
Rooms  784,  786,  788,  City  Hall. 


A.  J.  FULLER, 

General  Superintendent. 


C'tez-cte'tfztztei. . 


f /$0\S 


'/tSLot* 

ULaMa)  / oL  fo  v 

Jfotw  23W.J~D* 


£ O'  26*  * 


Z/rlZc  rl23o-U 

13  - 


/ 0 0. 


/>  a CL^O <^AAJtoS£<^T^ 


/ S 0 0.  00 


Ll  - 

Zo. 

* /d'/O’Oo 

J3T  - 

Jo. 

. 13?  o.oo 

•i^Z  - 

f. 

2 2 / o.  o o 

t_£,  ■ 

■ U 

Uz3o.LZ 

Water  Bureau  Remittance  Slip 


These  monies  were  deducted  directly  from  pay  warrants  by  bureau  officials. 
Note  the  absence  of  checks.  Everything  remitted  in  cash! 


11 


Fokm  156—11—1901—1000. 

CITY  OF  PHILADELP 


A STATEMENT  OF  AMOUNTS  TO  BE  COLLECTED  BY  THE  RECEIVER  0 
From — 


9 


'zz> 


IV&ITO. 

1W  ■ 5~° 

'%rfod  t/' 

1*11  Od  •S' 

gL2L$-£~0  ^ 

f • & o 

&%■£-<)  </" 
/?  / rfO  ^ 
A JS '3d 

Mf  0-0 
lUO  Go 
!~fO  00 


IS 

\S 


in  - $***  . 


J-f  Oj 


f.9± 

/OS’  0 d 
ACJ<1  •*-»  (x^-' 


ffytXJ  TQ&snyZ/ 


V-/ 


JJ  w UvtJj 

/ JT/  ^ £ >1 


Rough  Draft  of  Survey  Bureau  Remittance  Slip 
Evidently  considerable  care  was  put  in  on  these  papers.  The  final  type- 
written draft  of  this  remittance  slip  is  shown  on  opposite  page. 


It  must  be  remembered  that  especially  among  the  police 
and  firemen  extra  assessments  were  frequently  made. 

For  a great  many  years  the  assessments  payable  to  the 
City  Committee  were  collected  in  the  several  Bureaus  and 
remitted  officially  by  the  Department  to  the  Republican 
City  Committee.  Some  years  ago  this  practice  was  broken 
up  over  at  least  a part  of  the  Department,  as  the  men 


12 


preferred  to  make  their  remittances  in  person.  The  Ward 
Committee  assessments  were  paid,  by  the  greater  number  of 
the  employees,  at  the  Ward  Committee  rooms.  A postcard 
notice  calling  for  a special  meeting  of  the  Ward  Committee 
was  sent  to  the  employees,  and  they  went  in  person  on  the  given 
evening  to  the  Ward  Committee  and  paid  up.*  Men  of  the 
higher  grades  who  objected  to  this  method  remitted  by  check. 

In  order  to  estimate  the  total  amount  paid  by  all  depart- 
ments of  the  City  and  County  in  1903,  I have  had  taken  off 
the  salary  and  pay  warrants  counter-signed  for  that  year. 
The  total  for  Public  Works  is  $1,347,870.41,  and  the  same 
item  for  the  entire  City  totals  $8,773,356.36.  In  other  words, 
the  political  assessments  paid  in  the  Department  of  Public 
Works  must  be  multiplied  by  6^  in  order  to  determine  the 
total  assessments  for  all  City  and  County  employees.  Hence 
there  must  have  been  paid  in  1903  by  City  and  County  em- 
ployees'a total  of  nearly  $350,000.  These  figures  represent 
the  Controller’s  actual  payments,  while  the  assessments  are 
levied  on  salaries.  The  difference  between  these  would  appear 
to  be  ample  allowance  for  such  items  as  jury  and  witness 
service  where  obviously  political  assessments  were  impossible. 

By  1912  the  total  salary  and  pay  warrants  for  the  entire 
City  had  reached  $12,963,508.67,  so  that  if  in  1912  the  Repub- 
lican organization  had  still  been  in  the  saddle  the  office-holders 
would  have  had  to  pay  $516,572.36  on  the  basis  of  two  elec- 
tions a year,  or  $258,286.18  for  a single  election. 

The  law  requires  that  the  treasurers  of  campaign  committees, 
both  City  and  Ward,  shall  file  sworn  statements  as  to  their 
receipts  and  expenditures.  The  following  tables  show  the 
total  receipts  reported  by  the  Organization  for  the  two  bitter 
campaigns  of  1911  and  1912: 

1911  1912 

Total  for  47  Ward  Committees  $65,144.10  $54,839.86 

“ “ City  Committee  79,495.30  77,003.60 

$144,639.40  $131,843.46 

* One  type  of  notices  calling  for  this  assessment  and  sent  out  this  year  is 
shown  on  page  16. 


13 


It  is  to  be  presumed  that  some  other  contributions  were 
received  except  from  office-holders  — in  fact  some  large  con- 
tributions are  usually  reported  from  political  contractors  and 
their  business  associates.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  total 
contributions  of  office-holders  is  shown  to  be  greater  than  the 
total  receipts  reported,  it  is  a fair  question  as  to  what  happened 
to  the  balance.  It  has  always  been  a grievance  with  the  office- 
holders that  they  are  called  upon  for  the  same  contributions, 
contest  or  no  contest! 

It  has  also  been  responsibly  suggested  that  the  large  and  ap- 
parently generous  subscriptions  of  these  political  contractors  are 
later  returned  to  them  out  of  the  office-holders  contributions. 

You  were  elected  because  those  who  voted  for  you  believed 
that  your  pledge  to  serve  the  City  would  be  faithfully  kept. 
Naturally  those  most  interested  in  having  you  fail  were  and 
are  the  enemies  of  the  kind  of  politics  that  is  fair,  clean,  and 
altogether  honest,  and  which  has  its  mainspring  in  the  voters 
themselves  and  not  in  an  organized  band  of  self-seeking  and 
self-perpetuating  exploiters  of  the  public  working  under  the 
guise  of  the  dominant  political  party.  Naturally  also,  these 
most  thinly  disguised  enemies  of  the  whole  public  are  more  or 
less  expert  in  throwing  dust  in  the  eyes  of  the  public.  They 
rely  upon  a strong  and  almost  universal  trait  of  partisanship 
for  the  acceptance  as  truths  of  criticisms  which  reflect  upon  the 
efficiency  and  sincerity  of  those  really  striving  to  serve  the 
whole  people,  criticisms  which  are  not  based  upon  the  facts  and 
have  no  relation  to  truth  or  fairness.  Thus  they  mislead  and 
often  with  too  much  success  further  their  utterly  selfish  schemes. 

For  many  years  this  City  has  been  in  the  control  of  a 
selfish  and  relentless  band  of  political  free-booters,  who  have 
with  great  skill  and  (by  the  cohesive  force  of  public  plunder) 
maintained  an  almost  unbroken  sway.  It  is  humiliating  to 
contemplate  this  particular  phase  of  the  power  of  this  Organ- 
ization, that  of  a regularly  levied  assessment  upon  the  office- 
holders of  the  City  and  County. 

That  efforts  are  still  being  made  to  levy  these  assessments 
on  employees  of  this  department  is  shown  by  the  issuance  of 


14 


70 


]sOLA,hOuuu 


1 


15 


off 

BUREAU  OF  WATER. 


ROOM  790.  CITY  MALL. 





■2^0.  o o 

//a.  o o 


CmUX^&*£1> 

J) 

^7n&/St 

“ )?Z*^7&yr 

JotrfTtts 

ybA4«^<>  Jf~ 

^2&e^{U^-  7 7s>^lPri*0->T_. 

Jb%££s  X/  (77c*zy£jL<_^ 

77/-&C-  0^^Ls/  //< 

<^C4*^e.t**'y’kh/ 

77<^?7/  Oy'^^/ 


/Po  khzy?£crz-^&' 

/t/~0  0 (77ir-t>jC/^ 

&-  *rr 

*2^0  C^o/kLu^,  £26l*^£4-^U^- 
/tf^OO  <^//  tz-y' 

*p  o a *^•£0  ’^kzr-zr/&<* 

fo  o Jl 
foa 

/0*C&  O 


^ rJkf&C'  &S  s$?trzcrrzJ 


/sy>o 

/6y~J> 

^o°<Z&0 

o &Z144L,  ^trr^!^ 

J20  &y/~^  77*0  &s^ZS?~r^<> 


dVf.tfr 

✓ 

JZ2(0O 

yj 

/ ?;o  o 
//'a* 
/fao 

/ 

/S~d0 

r 

/i2/70 

r 

/syo 

V 

/x/~*o 

2 

//~O0 

•s 

//~0O 

/<f'0C> 

• iS 
//'/><? 

V' 

/<Too 

2 

/S~40 

V 

/pT-0  0 

* */ 
/2"0  0 

’ s 

/S~<?  o 
2 

/2~o  O 

/2~0O 
* 1 / 

y^"00 

2 

Si0~<?a 

TrjJ7/s~ 


TTZR/Hf 

Water  Bureau  Office  Roll 

All  the  Water  Bureau  schedules  were  done  in  long  hand  and  accompanied 
by  a free  use  of  red  ink  for  the  rulings! 

orders  similar  to  those  shown  in  cut  on  this  page.  Notices 
similar  to  this  were  sent  early  in  the  present  week  to  a number 
of  our  employees.  In  some  instances  those  who  received  the 
notices  did  not  even  know  of  the  existence  of  the  political  club 
referred  to. 


Dear  Sir:- 


Call  at  the  Union  Republioan  Cluh  of  South  Philadelphia,  2035  3, 
Broad  atroet,  Ilonday  October  13th,  or  Tuesday  October  14th,  1913,  from 
7-30  to  9-30  P.  U, 


BIPORT AST 


Call  for  Ward  Assessment 


This  notice  is  signed  by  Magistrate  Geo.  K.  Hogg,  a recog- 
nized organization  leader  in  South  Philadelphia. 

The  facts  which  I present  herewith,  and  the  deductions  I 
make  from  them,  indicate  that  through  this  form  of  assess- 
ment upon  the  office-holders  the  whole  people  have  been 
supporting  this  self-seeking  band  and  that  Republicans,  Demo- 
crats, Prohibitionists,  Socialists  and  members  of  all  other 
parties,  tax-payers,  alike  have  all  made  contributions  which 
make  possible  their  own  political  enslavement. 

But  my  object  in  going  to  so  much  detail  in  this  matter, 
and  especially  in  publishing  actually  the  names  and  amounts 
of  the  contributions  of  many  of  my  present  associates  in  the 
Department  is  to  substantiate  in  the  fullest  possible  manner 
more  general  statements  heretofore  made  which  latter  have  been 
denied  by  the  responsible  leaders  of  the  Organization.  It  must 
be  taken  in  the  second  place  as  an  earnest  of  my  desire  to  do 
what  lies  within  my  power  to  break  up  this  unholy  system. 

May  I remind  you  at  the  same  time  that  the  solicita- 
tion of  political  contributions  has  since  1905,  according  to 
the  laws  of  Pennsylvania,  been  a misdemeanor?  Further,  as 
these  figures  seem  to  give  the  lie  to  the  sworn  statements 
of  the  several  treasurers  of  the  Republican  City  and  Ward 
Committees  as  to  the  amounts  used  in  the  several  campaigns, 
I feel  that  with  this  information  in  my  possession  I would  be 
false  to  my  oath  of  office  if  I did  not  share  with  you,  and 
thus  place  at  the  disposal  of  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  protect 
the  community  in  such  matters,  these  data  which  have  come 
to  my  attention.  Yours  very  truly, 

October  18, 1913.  M.  L.  Cooke,  Director. 


